[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [bpfk] type-3 fu'ivla with different kinds of rafsi
Jorge Llambías wrote:
I wish we could come to a consensus on this. On the one hand, I tend
to agree with John in principle, on the other hand, these forms are
already quite widespread in practice, and nobody but John (and,
depending on the day, me)
Me, too, for what my opinion is worth. And very strongly at that.
One of the key mods we made from TLI Loglan to Lojban was to eliminate
the corresponding monosyllable CVVs, which in turn led us to add the
apostrophe to the language. Going back on that essentially removes the
justification for adding the apostrophe, and fu'ivla are by intent NOT
an important enough part of the language to drive design.
seems to care (and then why couldn't "a mere
palatalization and labializaton" not be an allowed realization of
them).
I dunno about you, but I cannot tell the difference between siV and ciV
because of palatalization. And IIRC, native speakers of languages
without an l/r distinction have especial problems with those letters
followed by iV and uV diphthongs.
We shouldn't be making the language harder to speak in order to make it
easier to coin fu'ivla (I'm sure Pierre disagrees, of course).
lojbab
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BPFK" group.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list?hl=en.